The term "datacenter" is also losing much of it's meaning and that is having consequences elsewhere.

For the past 4-5 years a local company has been building a new office/datacenter building as they are growing. Now this isn't some AI company building a multi-hundred-megawatt facility, this is a local company who does colocation, web hosting, servers, you know, all that stuff the term datacenter used to stand for. Doubly so that this company decided to make at least an interesting looking building instead of another flat, windowless white box.

Now on local social media this building has been swept up in opposition with folks repeating boundless conspiracy theories and wanting the whole thing shut down. You try explaining the difference but it's deaf ears. You even try and tell them "hey, their existing datacenter has been like 1 mile away for a decade and there is another, larger datacenter down the block that's been there better part of 3 decades and nobody has complained.

  Now on the one hand I also can empathize with them a bit, the layman isn't going to know the difference between those and these new AI centers but people are ready to spike an actual local company, a small business that has grown quite a bit, the exact thing we should be celebrating.

Once again I don't so much blame AI itself but it's proponents and the companies behind them. So far their tech and business is making so many things worse faster than it can do any of it's so called improvements.

You can't even engage with the question, what a joke.

Everyone is 12.

Inertia, fear of the unknown, the need to feel a threat and taking it to existential levels, and the need to pile hate on something.

AI such as it is, is definitely not very perfect at the moment, but then again, no new technology is. Tubes and radio that put a lot of landline telegraphers out of work, Then replaced by transistors, then by integrated circuits, didn't spring like Venus from the ocean, fully formed. So many other examples of technology being disruptive, but in the end useful.

Over 35 years of employment, I shifted knowledge and ability several times as technology changed. Some didn't, like that lady photographer who worked with me that really resisted digital. Last time I heard, she's a waitress at an Olive Garden. No issue with waitressing, but quite the leap from being an industrial photographer.

Would it not be a perfect world if we simply refused to adapt? Reject technology outright. Technological Amish, except in order to be consistent, we have to go back to hunter gatherer ways, and no gadammend tools, just use rocks that are available, no cooking with fire. Just a totally free world without the scourge of technology, where are all free and happy.

Yes, that's reductio ad absurdum. but let's face it, we've seen the doom and gloom and hatred some have of technology shifts. People have lost the jobs they had, and adapted to new ones Perhaps you would like to return to subsistence farming?

Standing for malware designed to sabotage is still sabotage, and you'll find yourself on the losing end of that war.

There will be job shifting, just like in every other technology advance. And emplacing malware inside software is just a 21st Century version of throwing your sabots into the machinery to disrupt it. It will likely work just as well, as in not.

With the likely outcome that people will try out the software, have it nuke their initial tests, and decide it just doesn't work.

I think part of it is based on inertia.I've always went with changing technology, not tried to impede it. When I started in electronics, early 70's, Vacuum tube technology was being intuded on by Transistors, and Integrated circuits were starting their inclusion into electronics. A lot of people were unhappy.

In my department we made videos using tape editing technology. And a lot of technology geared toward computer animation using frame buffers and Frame by frame VTR's. The final product being a VHS or Beta tape. Then came Non-linear editing, and the smart money jumped ship on the old system, especially when computers became faster. The final product was so much better when we could show animations as QT or mpeg. A lot of people on the production end were unhappy.

But on a human level, I was tasked with implementing a digital photography system, and implementing it's workflow. The photographer at the time was a woman who loved old school chemical photography, and hated digital. She even went to our boss, complaining I was being secretive and keeping her out of the process, that my planning wouldn't work. He showed her the stack of memos and workflows I had produced, noting her name was on the distribution list. She even tried doing intentionally shitty digital work as a form of sabotage, claiming I didn't design a good system and digital wouldn't work anyhow.

Prints and slides were going by the wayside. Computer presentation and publications were using digital output. The world had changed.

The upshot, she lost her job, and another photographer who would do digital work without intentionally doing crappy work came on board.

Technology happens - we can fight it, or go along with it. A person in technology needs to adopt lifelong learning. They need to look at where the technology is going. They need to fight the inertia so many people have.

Forming a union around the time that AI takes their jerbs is the likely dynamic. On the bright side, they'll be able to Work from home - maybe that is RFH. "Relax"

Ant this isn't anti-union, it is just that the union employees won't have a lot of leverage. Striking will just speed the AI replacement part along.

That's moral relativism. It is neither right nor wrong to ban porn.

Personally, I don't feel strongly about it. It doesn't affect me, I don't make money selling it. Yet, I don't want to pay taxes so a bureaucrat can regulate it.

What do you think it will be and then we'll see who's closer

And the Trump administration will blame it on O'Blama.

This! I switched to DDG , and the underlying theme of the new Google search paradigm s that you have to accept hallucinating search results.

Yes, and it an ability we have now. Should be step one.

That's not too difficult, place a couple Tesla magnets at Lagrange points and there ya go. Yes, without a viable magnetosphere, any atmosphere we generate will be stripped away by the solar wind.

Yup, it won't stay confined to US borders for long.

What will be very funny is when Trump eventually cuts a deal the best case scenario is for... drum roll... inspectors. Except this time Iran will get even more money and sanctions relief than they did in 2015. Art of the deal baby.